The RAPIT forum at the Wharfinger Wednesday painted pretty pictures of a future “green” port in Humboldt Bay.
Speakers included reps from Goldman Sachs and Ports America (an operator for Goldman Sachs), former Assemblyman Dan Hauser and a “token oyster farmer.” Here’s a slice of their vision for Humboldt’s future:
- T-shirts for Wal-Mart
- Chinese car imports (2-5 years away)
- Military shipments — including tanks
- “Anything you can pour” or lift with a crane from Asia and Europe
- Wind towers
- Products destined for the Central US
The forum was heavy on the green theme — despite certain anti-green points noted above. Even the post cards make you want to hug a tree. But don’t look too closely — forum hand-outs call for “Green Rail Yards” that use LNG.
Compare and contrast
There were notable differences between RAPIT’s forum and last week’s Bay Stewards forum. While RAPIT favored port/rail development, the Stewards opposed it.
The NCRA (North Coast Rail Authority) was invited to participate in the Bay Stewards forum, but declined after reportedly saying they weren’t on board with the project. But RAPIT featured an open letter from NCRA Chairman Alan Hemphill written specially for the RAPIT crowd. As Richard Marks points out, the forum was interrupted for the good tidings to be read aloud.
Another notable difference was Harbor Commission CEO David Hull’s presentation. Unlike the Bay Stewards forum, Hull seemed optimistic about the future with Goldman Sachs. He didn’t mention the many “places where negotiations could fall apart.”
Oh, and about the plan for all those cruise ships? The Harbor District doesn’t get how it could possibly work. Hull said even “in-house” they’re looking for a better explanation from plan author, TranSystems.
MORE: Eureka Reporter — Community forum focuses on harbor development
August 21, 2008 at 1:29 am
But which meeting had better snacks?
August 21, 2008 at 2:17 am
RAPIT meeting snacks were from COSTCO.
August 21, 2008 at 3:47 am
so were were the other one. Don’t worry, they don’t support big box.
August 21, 2008 at 5:30 am
LNG is a very clean fuel, would you rather have diesel? baykeepers do
So actually attended?
August 21, 2008 at 7:34 am
Dan Hauser was quoted in the ER as saying the railroad was never closed “for geologic reasons.” So what are landslides then?
Oh, what tangled webs we weave!
August 21, 2008 at 7:42 am
not in the canyon. The landslides happened after it was closed.
August 21, 2008 at 7:44 am
Beaurocrats 1 Citizens 0
August 21, 2008 at 8:04 am
So Cap, landslides that happened after the railroad closed are not “geologic reasons”?
Keep on weavin’!
August 21, 2008 at 8:09 am
after working on NON operable railroad in the mid 90’s, I can tell you that when a train went through the Scotia bluffs area, that section had to be repaired 95% of the time, maybe landslides happened after it was closed and never repaired and thats what you are referring to, talk to old timers who worked that area and they’ll tell ya the same thing, the railroad is not economicly viable because the cost/profit ratio. Heck the state was spending tens of thousands of dollars just having us prep the rails for years in hope of returning cars to them, but when it was tried, that area of the bluffs is the defining and reason why the railroad canot operate.
August 21, 2008 at 8:15 am
Semantics really, the railroad was closed by the Feds, as in the last straw, when the south end went down. The north end was having numerous closures and sections were non-operational before that.
August 21, 2008 at 8:19 am
Well lets see here, yes landslides are geologic. However they happened *after* it was closed. The Willits north was still running, the southern end was not.
August 21, 2008 at 8:20 am
As I recall, Dan Hauser pointed out in his “myths about the rail line” presentation that the line was still running on the North Coast when it was closed in ‘98. The landslides were in Marin/Sonoma, and the southern end of the line was inoperable.
August 21, 2008 at 8:37 am
Ports of America is not affiliated with Goldman Sachs. SSA is Goldman’s operation. Ports of America is their largest competitor.
I think the forum ilustrated very well the potential viability of our historic port and and rail systems as a “gateway” for trade.
I think the green thing was a bit overplayed and needs to be defined better. Peraps the Bay Stewards ans RAPIT coud co-host a forum to help build consensus about what “green port and rail” means.
August 21, 2008 at 8:54 am
Wind towers work so well, and yet they are awful blights on a landscape, a danger to flying flocks of birds and a noise issue. I wonder where they were thinking as a location for these?
August 21, 2008 at 9:04 am
I agree with anony.miss wind is bad, much better to go nuke.
August 21, 2008 at 9:10 am
Dan Hauser’s Exploded Myths about the NCRA:
The RR doesn’t need to make a profit, because it is publicly-owned.
The RR was closed down due to damage on the southern end, not in the Ell River canyon.
The cost to restore the RR is exaggerated, because it is the cost to completely stabilize the line (apparently is only needs partial stabilization).
Removal and cleanup costs would be more expensive than rebuilding the line.
Pete Oringer noted that Dan Hauser was both Chair of the NCRA board and CEO of Northwestern Pacific.
Also priceless was Bill Bertain’s claim that the green port and green RR will join the Arcata Marsh and Community Forest in a long line of green projects.
August 21, 2008 at 9:10 am
I am not a nuke fan, but the Europeans seam to have nuclear plants all over- you can see them when you travel. I am not a fan of offshore drilling, but maybe offshore wind towers….
August 21, 2008 at 9:12 am
Let me review the video, I can’t remember everything.
wind turbines kill less than communications towers, building/windows
A Summary of Existing Studies and Comparisons to Other Sources of Avian Collision Mortality in the United States
wind power faq
August 21, 2008 at 9:12 am
Shell has a proposed wind farm out on the Bear River bluffs, 6 miles south of Ferndale.
http://highboldtage.wordpress.com/2008/05/29/bear-river-wind-project-shell-windenergy/
August 21, 2008 at 9:15 am
Nice obfuscation of the issues with semantics. The tanks were mentioned to give an idea of how large a piece of machinery could be loaded on one of the speakers Ro-ro ships that they use to ship cars to Hawaii. Never said that tanks would be shipped out of Humboldt Bay, just that they have the capability to move semi-trucks, tractors, earth moving equipement.
Wind towers were also a passing mention as an example of break bulk cargo. Who says they would be used here? T. Boone Pickens wants to use them in the midwest.
And Dan Hauser correctly pointed out that an operable railroad is needed to disassemble the line in those areas where there are no roads. So the rail has to be repaired to take it apart. Wonder what that will cost.
August 21, 2008 at 9:18 am
um, i believe the french had two nuclear “oopses” last month. sure, there are lots of plants, but quantity does not mean safety!!
August 21, 2008 at 9:58 am
“And Dan Hauser correctly pointed out that an operable railroad is needed to disassemble the line in those areas where there are no roads. So the rail has to be repaired to take it apart. Wonder what that will cost.”
Bunk, just grade a temporary access road along the rail bed as you pull up the line. The same way it is done for all rail scrap operations.
August 21, 2008 at 10:16 am
LNG may have found a new Ventura home. Go see:
http://www.clearwaterport.com
August 21, 2008 at 10:19 am
Grading a temporary road for heavy equipment is easier sad than done. Also expensive. Why not just repair the rail?
August 21, 2008 at 10:20 am
Remember, this is in the highly ustable (whoa help me I’m falling into the river) Eel River canyon section.
August 21, 2008 at 10:21 am
And then removing the ties and rails will be just like a day hike.
August 21, 2008 at 10:30 am
NO one is commenting on the effects of constant train traffic thru the south edge of Arcata and Eureka Old Town on the economy of each city. IN order for the railroad to be profitable 20 to 40 trains a day would be needed. That’s one to two an hour every 24 hours, 7 days a week. It is not hard to see what the impact would be. Eureka’s waterfront would be cut off for foot and car traffic many times a day. The economic impact would be much more than anyone is talking about.The south end of Arcata would have the same problems. Just think if you had a restaurant on the wrong side of the tracks at lunch time. This concept is a killer for any business along the route. Let alone the noise levels. This only benefits BIG BUSINESS.
August 21, 2008 at 10:31 am
Tell me again how many people have died in nuclear accidents in the United States. Now tell me how many have died in the coal industry, the LNG industry, etc.
August 21, 2008 at 10:36 am
Big eco usually only benefits big business, as it prices out small competitors who can’t keep up with the regulations.
Now that “Green” has been made as hip as “Organic” we’ll find that everybody is “green,” just like everything is “organic.”
August 21, 2008 at 10:41 am
T Boone says we have lot’s of natural gas to power what wind can’t. So why are we still building LNG terminals. Is it that much cheaper to ship it from Asia in diesel powered tankers?
August 21, 2008 at 10:43 am
“Grading a temporary road for heavy equipment is easier sad than done. Also expensive.”
john, you do not know what you are talking about here. Tracks have very little tolerance for variations in elevation, material, earth movement. A dirt track for moving equipment is very inexpensive.
If your theory was true we would be hauling trees out from the forests on rail.
August 21, 2008 at 10:43 am
Dosen’t rail advocate Moss Bittner work for Bertain?
August 21, 2008 at 10:44 am
10:31, care to include Russia in your comparison
August 21, 2008 at 10:46 am
Alter Net has an interesting article about Pickens and his wind energy plan. There’s always another side to things.
Why T. Boone Pickens’ ‘Clean Energy’ Plan Is a Ponzi Scheme
http://www.alternet.org/water/95471/why_t._boone_pickens%27_%27clean_energy%27_plan_is_a_ponzi_scheme/
August 21, 2008 at 10:48 am
How are you going to put a dirt track in without an EIR?
August 21, 2008 at 10:53 am
Who said that for a dismantling option and EIR wouldn’t be required? I’m not even advocating removing the tracks. All I’m saying is that it is a ‘myth’ that you need to rebuild the tracks in order to remove them.
August 21, 2008 at 11:03 am
Thank You Anon. 10:46!! Every time I hear someone mention T. Boone Pickens I cringe. The notion that he is touting clean energy is absurd. He is simply finding a new monopoly and he will be as ruthless in this arena as he has been in the past.
August 21, 2008 at 11:05 am
Jesus. Just build the trail already and send these rail supporting politicians into retirement.
August 21, 2008 at 11:13 am
When a tycoon billionaire gets on TV and says that he needs your help, ALARM BELLS should be ringing. What he really needs is YOUR MONEY.
August 21, 2008 at 11:24 am
Irregardless of T Boone’s motives, the abundance of natural gas in the US is a fact. LNG is natural gas from Asia. Still don’t see why we need to have terminals to import it.
August 21, 2008 at 11:24 am
I think Hank Sims sums it up fairly well-
http://www.northcoastjournal.com/issues/2008/08/21/good-bye-all/
August 21, 2008 at 11:27 am
And who is going to be responsible for maintaining the trail?
August 21, 2008 at 11:51 am
The North Coast Trail Authority (NCTA), of course. Like the NCRA it is owned by the public and doesn’t have to turn a profit. In fact it will cost less to maintain and generate revenue from actual users.
August 21, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Rairoad is a thing of the past, but so much fun to ride.
August 21, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Good article by Sims. Thanks Anonn.
August 21, 2008 at 12:23 pm
If the Rail Road is a thing of the past, then cars and airplanes are the future of transportation? Really?
August 21, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I have to respectfully disagree with Hank Sims on this one.
August 21, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Rail removal is a different story today then what Dan Hauser thinks. Salvage prices have gone up so much that the NCRA could get paid (yes paid) to remove it.
Rail removal firm will pay to complete work
August 21, 2008 at 12:52 pm
BTW – Dave Hull took his PowerPoint to the Headwaters board yesterday looking for more money. Kinda got the cold shoulder.
August 21, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Someone asked if there would be more Headwaters money for this plan and Dave said when they run out they run out.
But Bill Bertain said the Headwaters Fund is primarily for port-rail infrastructure.
That’s news to me.
August 21, 2008 at 1:04 pm
From the Headwaters Fund site:
Base industries are industries that bring dollars into Humboldt County through sales to customers outside of the County. Development of industry clusters, groups of businesses and other organizations related by industry and activity, is key to Prosperity! The North Coast Strategy (the County’s comprehensive economic development strategy). The nine existing industry clusters are Forest Products, Tourism, Dairy & Dairy Processing, Fisheries & Aquaculture, Specialty Agriculture & Horticulture, Manufacturing, Arts & Culture, Education & Research, and Information Technology. Representatives from each cluster are continuing to develop cluster work plans that outline projects and activities that will benefit cluster growth and economic development.
The Headwaters Fund Board recently completed a strategic planning process that identified the following priorities (within the Prosperity framework) for project funding:
Quality workforce – projects which focus on improving the quality and reliability of our local workforce
Transportation – projects that reduce or remove barriers to cost-effective goods movement
Business climate – projects that support or reduce barriers to business growth and development
Community infrastructure – projects that ensure or improve infrastructure for economic development, particularly those that leverage significant outside funding
August 21, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I think Hank Sims nailed this pretty well but I doubt if the curtain will stay closed on this drama very long. In theater circles I believe this sort of play is called a “farce”. So why drive all the way to Ashland, OR and pay $50 for a seat when we can sit here at some and laugh at this outrageous behavior. Don’t forget to peek behind the curtain once in a while and open it for us when the slapstick begins again.
August 21, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Yeah, anon 2:38, it may be a farce and entertainment to you but its is causing real harm and suffering for others. Instead of beginning the development real economic opportunites that many now here could benefit from, a few consultants and board members are being enriched while fat cat landholders sit comfortably on their haunches paying little taxes, not caring that their properties lie fallow. In the meantime, social problems from economic malaise increase and another generation lives in poverty so the people in charge can keep their control and wealth intact.
August 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm
I talked to a maintance engineer who worked on the railroad thru the Eel river canyon in the 1970s. He said that it required over 3mil a month then just to keep trains moving. The repair work was constant then from land movement caused by rain and earthquakes. He was confident that that figure would be four times that now. That is 144mil in todays money. The profit just doesn’t pencil out.It is another bridge to nowhere. He said there were times when winter rains shut down the line for up to two weeks. It was lumber waiting at the rail head then and it will be chinese widgets today. Walmart’s shelves will just have to sit empty I guess.
August 21, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Looks like it’s all flying and cars. After all highway 101 is maintained with tax dollars so it doesn’t have to make financial sense. And if the Airlines fail and shut down the flights to Arcata/Eureka, the government will just step in and bail them out. That doesn’t mean they will keep flights here though. Cars and planes are where we should be focusing our transportation future on. After all, trains are expensive and most of Amtrak service is sold out anyway. Yep it’s the good old automobile and trucking industry for me. We can always drill the coast for more oil. The guy at Mikes Garlic Fries says it will only take 2 years to get oil off the coast of California.
Yep, drill, fly and drive.
August 21, 2008 at 4:16 pm
I don’t know how electric planes would work, but we could fuel all our ground transportation with electricity generated from wind.
August 21, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Trucking isn’t looking at electric trucks though.
August 21, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Even more reason to conserve what oil we have left for what has to have it then, right?
August 21, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Yeah, I am all for the Compressed Air Car and Electric vehicles. Just that trains seem to be more economical than trucks.
August 21, 2008 at 4:21 pm
We pay for the destruction of highway 101 from all the trucks and nobody has a problem with that?
August 21, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Can’t trucks use natural gas?
Trains are more economical than trucks if you don’t have to constantly rebuild the rail they use exclusively. Trucks use the same roadway passenger vehicles do.
August 21, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Truckers pay fuel taxes too.
August 21, 2008 at 4:23 pm
How much do we spend rebuilding the 101 and 299?
August 21, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Nothin better than getting out on the 101 through the redwoods and cruising with the trucks next to you and the top down. Yeah, that’s living.
August 21, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Trucks could get cheaper diesel if it came in tankers on a train.
August 21, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Not that I would want tankers on those tracks.
August 21, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Nothing is perfect is it? I wish trucks had their own freeways, but then I don’t think anyone wants duplicate freeways everywhere. And you know, there is rail just about every where but here and the highways are still clogged with trucks, particularly I-5. Why isn’t all that cargo shipped by train?
August 21, 2008 at 4:29 pm
The tracks are all full already. Trains work.
August 21, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Tom, you’re wrong about trucking – they are looking very closely at a hybrid turbine system, similar to what is going in a lot of NYC’s newest buses.
http://www.dieselnet.com/news/2001/03capstone.php
Hybrid is not pure electric of course, but these units will be fuel flexible and far more efficient than existing diesel engines, as well as far less polluting.
August 21, 2008 at 4:31 pm
So if they built more tracks in areas where trains don’t slide into canyons they would save even more oil to be used where they do?
August 21, 2008 at 4:32 pm
There are many bottlenecks and more tracks need to be laid. They are just about maxed out near L.A. and the Bay Area. Less so when you get further from the ports.
August 21, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Our rail, if running, would have all the same bottlenecks, beyond the Bay Area as Oakland.
August 21, 2008 at 4:41 pm
If I were king, I would build a monorail to the bay area. The one at Disneyland has been in service since about 1960 and it still works.
You don’t need to grade or buy much land and animals can walk right underneath them. You need one in each direction though.
Not good for freight, but the trucks could have the 101 while I ride with my coctail above the ground in a monorail.
August 21, 2008 at 4:42 pm
oopt, I mean, cocktail.
August 21, 2008 at 4:42 pm
I must have started early today.
August 21, 2008 at 4:43 pm
I can’t even spell oops.
August 21, 2008 at 4:46 pm
It’s after 5 somewhere.
August 21, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Tom, until you are king can we have the trail?
August 21, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Monorails are nice to ride in, I agree Tom.
But they are for some reason very expensive to build. Just 3 years ago they were talking about a five mile monorail loop around Reno from the downtown to the convention center to the airport/hospital and back. The cost was $1,000,000,000 per mile. That’s right with a “B.”
Over $200,000 per FOOT.
Seattle has a monorail and I don’t think it cost anything like that but it was buildt some years ago and the reviews are mixed on how well it has worked out.
have a peaceful day,
Bill
August 21, 2008 at 5:36 pm
The Disneyland monorail has drivers that add to the continued cost of running it. I think the more expensive ones are trying to go all automation. Maybe Reno should have contracted with Disneyland instead, they would have taken the thing out if it wasn’t cost effective.
As for trails, I’m a big fan. Where I grew up, we had a couple of great trails that were put in when the tracks were pulled out. It made a great green belt between homes and actually went somewhere. The sad thing is that the tracks that were ripped out were once home to electric trollies that went from Orange County all the way to L.A.
I would have rather had the trollies.
August 21, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I think the biggest conflict over rails and trails here in Humboldt is the route around the bay. I would love to see both. I think people would drive to either end just to enjoy the ride or walk around the bay and it would add to the enjoyment of living in our area.
August 21, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Are there any good prospects for both?
August 21, 2008 at 5:42 pm
It seems most people are saying it’s an either or proposal. Then I have also heard some propose building a trail until and or if the railroad comes back.
August 21, 2008 at 5:47 pm
It seems the NCRA is the main opponent of a trail around the bay.
Is it physically impossible to do both?
August 21, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Hey Buettner, got look at the location of where that company is tearing out those tracks and paying to do it and then check out our railroad. Notice anything different?
August 21, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Our tracks aren’t paved over yet?
August 21, 2008 at 6:25 pm
If you think this rail line is absolutly the worst ever built in the USA, then what about the railroad to the Florida Keys?
August 21, 2008 at 6:27 pm
They have a railroad in the Florida keys? Wow. I bet that never washes out!
August 21, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Hurricanes took care of that railroad during the 1930’s.
August 21, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Which makes me think of the bridges here. Who would either rebuild or maintain those if it was turned into a trail?
August 21, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Is there passenger service on that line? That would make a pretty cool trip. Maybe not during hurricane season though.
August 21, 2008 at 6:41 pm
The mantinence and liability would seem to be a problem for a trail.
There’s just not enough money backing it. I think a trail around the bay would be small enough to possibly find funding for. The Eel River Canyon is something else.
August 21, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Some good news about trails is that they are finally widening Old Arcata Road and adding a bike lane on the shoulder and that would make a nice bike ride to Eureka. Also, has anyone ever floated an idea for a trail from Arcata through Samoa to the bridge? There would need to be better access over the bridge and that would be pretty costly, but has that ever been explored?
August 21, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Maybe walk a portion of it during high tide. At low tide the bay stinks to high heaven. I believe very few will walk between Arcata and Eureka, except maybe as a Saturday event held by some hiking group that performs an interpretive walk.
August 21, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Oh, and let’s put to rest the term “walk” when referencing a “walk” between Arcata and Eureka. Seven to eight miles is a “hike” for most people, not a Sunday stroll, not to mention the return hike.
August 21, 2008 at 7:07 pm
At the risk of being taken a fool….Why hasn’t anyone advocated for using the tracks for a train that just goes as far south as it can before hitting the slide, and as far north as….say Crescent City. Just a simple commuter train, or start small, like a trolley type of deal between McKinleyville and Fortuna?
I’m sure there must be a million reasons why this wouldn’t work. But I haven’t heard it talked about.
August 21, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Aren’t most trail enthusiasts mainly interested in a bike trail for transportation rather than recreation, although recreation is certainly a major issue as well?
August 21, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Yes, Tom. MANY people say do both. Just not the trail advocates, from what I have seen. You are correct. It need not be an either/or proposal.
And there are many people working on extending the trail system, Have been for years, long before Buettner and crew came along.
August 21, 2008 at 7:29 pm
A trail between Eureka and Arcata would certainly see more bike activity than anything… especially for those commuting between cities.
I haven’t heard of any proposal for an Eel River canyon trail as yet.
Railbanking is proposed for the Eureka / Arcata corridor. Railbanking removes the track and builds the trail on the RR right of way. Railbanking requires the relaying of the track should rail return though it has to be outside of a time window set by the STB.
There are many available sources for funding trail construction and maintenance.
August 21, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Moviedad, there are parts of the tracks that need work even between Fortuna and Arcata. They are currently fixing tracks accross from our station near the PG&E plant. I also would love to see a little commuter train from Arcata to Scotia or even down to the good camping and swimming holes. That would make a great weekend getaway.
August 21, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Here’s one effort for Humboldt County to acquire federal funding for non motorized transportation:
Humboldt People Powered Pathways (Hp3)
August 21, 2008 at 7:38 pm
A commuter train from Blue Lake to Arcata would have been fun too.
I hope the trail will be more valuable since that’s what we are getting.
August 21, 2008 at 7:42 pm
.
Besides the aesthetics of having a good trail, the other good thing about trails on old rails is that we still keep the right of way. Most places build over them so that we can never put mass transit there ever again. One never really knows what the future holds.
August 21, 2008 at 7:43 pm
How would a commuter train pay for itself?
August 21, 2008 at 7:46 pm
TRAILBLAZERS, The Journal, August 1998
August 21, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Commuter trains and busses are usually subsidized. Amtrak has lost money for most of it’s existence. Now however, they are sold out. The Airlines are subsidized. The auto industry is technically subsidized at least the fuel they use is. The cost of taking over other countries by the U.S. military is not factored into the price of a gallon of gas.
I do think the rider traffic would be good though for a local commuter train. Have you been on a bus lately? They are pretty full. You charge people to use it and that helps pay for it.
August 21, 2008 at 7:55 pm
I guess what we have to do to fund it is to get congress to steal the money from some other state. We don’t get the transportation funds we deserve in California in proportion to the amount we send to the Feds. If we had someone like Sen. Stevens of Alaska we would have what we need and our senator would be going to jail.
I guess he was not the best analogy.
August 21, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I guess what I am saying is that we steal the money from Alaska.
They have a bridge they could sell.
August 21, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Wow Rose, good link.
August 21, 2008 at 8:07 pm
It would seem that a long enough trail would open up opportunities for business. I could imagine a snack bar or watering hole for passers by to refresh themselves along the trip.
August 21, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Once again, Heraldos blog has been a great place to get things out in the open. If we can’t do this right, who could? Some great brains hang out here. Gotta go get some eats now. I’ll check back tomorrow.
August 21, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Ok, another crazy idea: What about using a combination of wind generators and wave energy to offset the cost of the train, if the train is electricity driven. plugged in overhead, by wire, or underground?
Oh, wait! I have it. we could use traffic offenders and those who have had their license drive revoked, as “Galley Slaves,” who have to push hand levers to power the train. Like Jury Duty, “…Sorry, I can’t this weekend, I have train lever duty.”
August 21, 2008 at 8:21 pm
August 21, 2008 at 8:22 pm
There has been alot of progress since then, Tom. You’d be surprised.
August 21, 2008 at 8:23 pm
User fees. It’s also dependent upon the train stopping in the best places and efficient bus service outward from that. Our current bus system sucks unless you’re lucky to live in an opportune location. Me? If my last job it was an hour bus ride for a 10 minute drive.
August 21, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Great ideas to chew on, however most will gather dust at Goldman Sachs and David hull’s desk. Their only aim is to make big bucks and damn the torpedoes.
August 22, 2008 at 10:01 am
Throughout European countries there is reliable commuter train service that is powered by electricity. Probably a little tricky to set up here, but solar panels could assist as well as some wind generators. And there are new wind generators that look like a weird lampshade, not huge fans that would be more wildlife friendly. Dream a little dream with me. This could provide commuter service up here and Marin County can fight for denying freight service and still have no commuter train as commuter trains have to be subsidized as they are in Europe. But why do we pay taxes – to bomb other countries or to improve the quality of life for our citizens.
August 22, 2008 at 10:11 am
Exactly, what is the purpose of our governmental structure; if not to curtail the greed of those who put making money, above the good of our society?
August 22, 2008 at 10:49 am
David Bull & Goldman Sacks of Money?
August 22, 2008 at 12:55 pm
While you all dream the practical among us will work on rail banking so we can have something real now. When your dream comes true the right of way will be waiting for you.
August 22, 2008 at 1:28 pm
anon; your rail banking will come true MAYBE, dreams are still what you are investing in because real it isn’t. Some people are afraid to try some things that are not the majority idea, hence our current state of affairs in this country. Often the minority knows better than all the majority combined, otherwise we would not have a US. What is better, ways and means to a healthy environment or continuing the same polluting system that is in place? Which is practical?
August 22, 2008 at 3:19 pm
kateascot – the majority already believes railbanking is the right thing to do.
August 22, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Railbanking is good if you would rather ride a bike or take the bus than have a train. The problem with an electric train in the Eel River Valley is that the power source above the train would have to be too low for freight trains to clear. Freight does a double stacking on the cars and I think the overhead clearance would be different for the two. Electric train would be viable if the port/ freight idea didn’t work out. Passenger service might be able to pay enough money to attract federal transportation dollars but it would be more realistic to have freight and passenger service.
August 22, 2008 at 5:49 pm
If we were talking only about passenger service from, say, Arcata to Garberville or Scotia, then I think an electric train would be the way to go.
August 22, 2008 at 7:01 pm
It’s too bad we have to “Dream the Practical..” 12:55, but for a small light rail type of deal; all we need is a train, right now, we can make it electric later. now what does the other plan need, a hundred things going right, with no room for any one thing going wrong. I vote ‘Petticoat Junction.’
August 22, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Mike Buettner is needed again to explain the different standards in safety requirements for freight v passengers. There are NO PLANS FOR PASSENGER SERVICE out of Humboldt County. NCRA doesn’t want that to sink in because most people who are in favor of rail here want passenger service and NCRA knows that isn’t going to happen.
August 22, 2008 at 7:26 pm
anon 3:19: because the majority thinks it’s the right thing to do doesn’t make it so, if it did we’d be in paradise.
August 22, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Tom Sebourn and Moviedad, please please please… talk to even one transportation professional before you go on about passenger rail in humboldt county. You will very quickly find that it is very expensive and with a very small population like ours, no one will fund it and it can not pay for its self. You will do better to ask for more buses.
August 22, 2008 at 8:51 pm
ELECTRIC buses
August 22, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I don’t need a transportation expert to tell me that right now with 12 men, we could haul 12 others with nothing more than hand carts. Silly, I know; I’m just trying to make a point. think small. “no passenger service out of Humboldt County…” great! Lets keep is light, small and local. It’s kind of ridiculous to talk about great expense of a small, local thing compared to what is in the works, seriously, the “Port, the Container Facility…” Jeez, and yet, think local, do a Eureka to Arcata turnaround, can anyone actually say that wouldn’t be something that people would like? Riding in an old fashioned Locomotive. or a new-fangeled modern contraption. We’ll send Duane Flatmo over to the Applied Technologies Lab at HSU, and we’ll get Blue Ox to start getting the track ready…..
Ok, I’m just having fun. But there is nothing in the current suggestions for us, the people. just some shadow being called the “Economy,” this abstract notion always takes precedent over what might be good for the rest of us.
August 22, 2008 at 10:06 pm
The proposed railroad would not meet current national transportation standards for passenger service, particularly through the Eel River canyon’ only one track, clearances not wide enough for the right of way, signaling has to meet much higher standards than freight traffic, etc.
The EPA is the biggest hurdle for gravel mining on the Eel, so that will probably never happen. That would have been one of the bigger contracts for the proposed rail line, so there goes some of the operating money. I restate, it just doesn’t seem to pencil out.
August 22, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Lets forget the Eel River Canyon.
August 23, 2008 at 5:05 am
Takes gravel to build trails!
August 23, 2008 at 7:38 am
Who is John Williams?
August 23, 2008 at 10:10 am
John Williams is (NWP) the “operator” of our NCRA assets. Our wise NCRA board members gave him a 99 year lease to our public right of way. I’m sure he is very interested in your idea of 12 dudes building a kentic sculpture to run on “his” tracks… NOT!
August 23, 2008 at 10:13 am
From the Press Democrat
A troubled rail relationship
By JUDY ARNOLD
Published: Friday, August 22, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, August 22, 2008 at 5:31 a.m.
There is a commonly held assumption that the impacts of freight rail service on Novato and Sonoma County would be lessened if SMART is approved in November, because SMART has the authority to control the North Coast Railroad Authority in its freight operations. However, the NCRA has ceded most of its authority to its operator, the Northwestern Pacific Company (NWP). It is therefore critical to highlight for the public several comments submitted by the NWP on the draft environmental impact report by SMART.
I believe these comments clearly lay the groundwork for demands and possible lawsuits that the politically powerful and well-connected NWP intends to pursue. The fact is that the private, for-profit entity, NWP, is relying on SMART’s improvement of the tracks so that it can run freight from Eureka to Napa unimpeded.
Here are some excerpts from the NWP comments in the draft EIR. (To read the entire comments, go to: http://www.sonomamarintrain.org/userfiles/file/fseir_2-0_sets_c25-c29.pdf)
Regarding freight-passenger train operations and separation. The NWP states that SMART “assumes that freight trains would operate primarily during off-peak passenger service time periods . . . which makes freight operations subordinate to regularly scheduled passenger commute operations.”
NWP states “several legal agreements clearly provide that such priority shall not materially adversely affect NWP performance of its common carrier obligations.” NWP also states that newer signal systems would allow trains as close as three to four minutes behind preceding trains, and that SMART’s assumption of 30-minute headways would reduce the capacity of the NWP line to only two trains per hour in each direction.
Meanwhile, SMART states, without qualification, that freight operations will be subordinate to passenger operations and reiterated its commitment to provide 30-minute headways.
Which one is true?
Regarding hours of freight operation and system capacity: NWP claims SMART’s proposed freight-train schedules are unrealistic, especially if NWP operates a solid-waste train which will necessitate cooperation and connection schedules with the Union Pacific. NWP asserts that it must provide adequate rail freight service to the shippers and receivers on the NWP line, not all of which can be anticipated at this time.
SMART maintains that freight could be accommodated without night trains, likely with the elimination of the midday passenger train. Which one is true?
Regarding time separation between trains: SMART states they will receive a federal Rail Authority waiver to operate passenger trains on the same track as freight. They also state that such a waiver would be granted under strict time separation, or with new technology known as Positive Train Control (PTC) or else eliminate the midday passenger train.
NWP calls SMART’s assumption of PTC “unrealistically optimistic” and asserts that, without train control, NWP freight operations would be shifted largely to night operations under the time separation scenario.
SMART states that the cumulative analysis does not assume PTC and reiterates that the midday train would most likely be eliminated to achieve sufficient time separation and allow for midday freight service.
Which one is true?
Regarding public safety: The NWP raises questions and concerns about the setbacks planned for the bike and pedestrian path along the rail line from Cloverdale to Ignacio. Looking at other rail line requirements, NWP believes a 100-foot setback is required where speeds are in the 70 mph to 90 mph range for safety reasons. (SMART’s operating plan calls for 80 mph.) SMART plans bike-lane setbacks of between 15 and 40 feet with safety structures where necessary. Which one is true?
These comments from NWP and SMART clearly demonstrate that theirs is a troubled relationship. NWP seems poised to take an adversarial position against SMART on these issues. Novato and Sonoma County need to seriously question and demand answers from SMART and NWP before November.
Judy Arnold is a member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors.
August 23, 2008 at 11:46 am
Eureka city staff suggested at the Bay Stewards forum that the city will have some say in the timing of trains. Think again.
August 24, 2008 at 6:33 pm
“Eureka city staff suggested at the Bay Stewards forum that the city will have some say in the timing of trains.”
No control of timing of trains.
No control of frequency of trains.
No control of 110db horns of trains that will blast at some 12 Eureka at-grade crossings.
No control of length trains as they simultaneously block numerous street crossing in Old Town.
August 25, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Focus on Port first, railroad a far second. What makes us think we’ll ever get goods anywhere south of Fortuna? A wine train from Arcata to Fortuna has a better chance. How many agencies will be involved once the rail enters the Eel watershed let alone north of that? How about the cleanup of the last rail? The cost will be staggering indeed. The Middle Eel River is a sensitive area and beauracracy combined with geologic conditions make the possibility of a viable railroad through there virtually impossible. Federal environmental regulations will suffocate any railroad attempt. Go ground, go highway.
August 25, 2008 at 10:19 pm
But don’t widen Richardsons Grove!